User talk:Evil Greven
Boss Crsade Hi Evil Greven! Just a little heads-up: For your boss crusade, are you aware of this page? It might help you. -- 16:00, 1 March 2006 (CST) :Yeah, thanks though. PanSola gave me the heads up on that over in the GuildWiki talk:Task List. Ironically, I was just adding a link there to the crusade description. - Evil_Greven 16:02, 1 March 2006 Thanks Thanks for fixing the Seeking Blade template immage :) --Sagius Truthbarron 05:11, 2 March 2006 (CST) Didn't realise that wasn't your talk page... ^^; Elite tag The (Elite) tag should only go on boss pages, since you can't capture them from normal monsters, no reason to have it on their pages. See GuildWiki:Style and formatting/Bestiary. --Rainith 06:40, 2 March 2006 (CST) :Missed that. Revertting. - Evil_Greven 06:47, 2 March 2006 Category:Jade Didn't this wiki come to the conclusion that Mursaat and Jade armors should be merged into the same category? I don't recall off the top of my head, but I believe there was a discussion about it a while back... 69.124.143.230 09:31, 2 March 2006 (CST) :I haven't seen that one, I'm going off the discussion listed at Category_talk:Jade, but it's somewhat dated. Jade are the Warriors and Rangers of the Mursaat, which are strictly spell casters. - Evil_Greven 09:30, 2 March 2006 include / noinclude tag addition umm... check out GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Skills/Archive 4#14-day Vote: Revamp Skill boxes?. Basically we are going to implement a new skill box system that will make your efforts be completely wasted. Unless you are planning to use those particular skills in includes before the skill box format is settled. Of course, fixing broken ones is a good thing to do. But if a skill is not included by any article, my advise is to leave it alone. -PanSola 18:03, 2 March 2006 (CST) :Really? And here I just finished, too! I know I've even looked at that page... I thought it was for the floating vertical skill boxes that were off to the right side of the page, though. The reason I had it out for the Signet in particular was that was what got me blocked for a month... using the Glyphs page as a template for a similar Signets page. If it's a wasted effort... well, I'm stopping on Signets for now. I kind of think a complete revamp of the Skills pages are necessary.. they're rather messy, and have to be changed if something is changed on a different page. My thought was using the templates used on Glyphs for that. Of course, to make it universally-compliant, the would need another column for the (normally) class-specific cost (sacrifice, adrenaline, exhaustion). Time to call it a night, I'm rambling. - Evil_Greven 18:11, 2 March 2006 ::Alright, now that I got some rest I see where you were talking about. It looks like the voting has ended, though, is that correct? - Evil_Greven 01:53, 3 March 2006 :::Yes, the 14-day vote has ended. -PanSola 02:23, 3 March 2006 (CST) ::::So when do we start? :) -Evil_Greven 02:27, 3 March 2006 One more thing, I think you missed the fact that Option A1 won the vote, not A2... -PanSola 01:52, 4 March 2006 (CST) March 2nd Update Why do you keep reverting edits to certain skill changes from the March 2nd Update? eg. Ineptitude The game update clearly says 30...135, but you changed it to ...114? I don't have a Mesmer to confirm this, are you sure that the update data is incorrect? 69.124.143.230 03:52, 4 March 2006 (CST) :I have a level 20 primary of every class (2 accounts), and verified all skills before changing them (with the exception of Warrior's Endurance, which looked like it had remained the same). ArenaNet is using (0...15) attribute range for their update, rather than the standard (0...12) which is used here on the site (and I believe ingame when you first get a skill). -- Evil_Greven 04:04, 4 March 2006 :: any idea why they're using 1..15? 04:10, 4 March 2006 (CST) :::My theory is that the 1...15 scale is the linear progression the game mechanics use. Whereas 1...12 scale is the normal character rank range without using additional bonus modifiers. Not sure why they can't be consistent though -PanSola 04:18, 4 March 2006 (CST) ::::Ugh, yeah I saw a few things that would agree with the 1...15 scale -- bloody hell, that's aggrivating. 69.124.143.230 14:05, 4 March 2006 (CST) :::::Funny thing is, IIRC when the game first came out they did use 1...12 scale in the updates. They changed it sometime in the summer though. Since then, everytime there is an update for a skill, it gets edited 2-3 times before people leave it alone. --Rainith 14:08, 4 March 2006 (CST) ::::::I think even now when you unlock a skill, it still shows the (0...12) range, but I could be mistaken. -Evil_Greven 14:09, 4 March 2006 :::::::You are correct, well as of a few weeks ago anyway. I haven't unlocked a skill since yesterday's update, but the last time I did it was still the old range. --Rainith 14:12, 4 March 2006 (CST) ::::::::Unlocked two skills just now. As of today, the ingame range is still (0...12). - Evil_Greven 14:03, 6 March 2006 (CST) SoC Purge Why? Why why why? did you do that? -- 11:44, 4 March 2006 (CST) :Because I asked Rainith and he said to (see: GuildWiki_talk:Task_List#Acquisitions:_Signet_of_Capture) -Evil_Greven 11:44, 4 March 2006 (CST) ::It has been discussed before that any SoC info after the skill is available from quest or trainer is not worth keeping. --Rainith 12:02, 4 March 2006 (CST) Progression - Terms I modified some of the Progression Tables to have a terminology of sorts for their effects. While previously some of these were already this way, others were not, and I had kind of standardized them when I did the whole Progression Table update. However, looking back and thinking on it, the term "Duration" did not really fit well with the skills that caused effects. Some skills, such as Tainted Flesh, would have conflicting terminology in the tables themselves, and others, like Deadly Riposte, have a fixed skill duration which also conflicts with the term "Duration." Conditions are status effects; either on or off for a fixed duration of time, so replacing the "Duration" with the appropriate condition name should be naturally understandable without any need for footnotes such as "note in seconds" or somesuch. For now, I've halted at the Warrior skills, so if this is disagreed upon, I can always change it back without too much trouble. - Evil_Greven 17:24, 8 March 2006 (CST) :I think this standardization is a good idea. Honestly I haven't checked out what you've done, but I like the idea of this. --Rainith 11:11, 9 March 2006 (CST) ::One thing that bothers me about what I changed has to do with "Blind" effects... many skills say "Blinded" but while there is a redirect from Blind to Blindness, there is no existing one from Blinded. I went ahead and termed them as "Blindness" even though it conflicts slightly with the skill descriptions. - Evil_Greven 11:16, 9 March 2006 (CST). Progression - Values Please only fill in values verified in-game. If you have been interpolating the values between 0 and 12, jsut want to let you know that they in general do not scale linearily, even after taking rounding errors into consideration. This is because the actual internal linear range goes from 0 to 15. So if the steps are not a common factor of 12 and 15, assuming linear progression between 0 and 12 can give you some bad errors. And if the numbers you use are taking from in-game, then ignore this note d-: -PanSola 13:07, 9 March 2006 (CST) :I normally only verify numbers ingame. The only reason I didn't on some of the progression tables for Assassin & Ritualist was the margin of error involved and the little disclaimer at the tops of the pages. Anything that was less than whole numbers 0-12 progression was simply left blank, as was all of the 13-19 progression (at least, the ones I did numbers for). If it needs to be changed I'll work on it, but I figured as I went along putting the progression tables in I might as well put some bare estimates based on the ranges. - Evil_Greven - 13:20, 9 March 2006 (CST) Pagename If you really think should be used like you're changing all those templates to use, then it should be in the templates themselves. --68.142.14.96 12:37, 10 March 2006 (CST) :It would be nice, yes, but at the moment there's still the upload bug. Thusly, so far it's not in the template. However, if it ends up getting included in some form of template, then it will already be there. - Evil_Greven - 13:21, 10 March 2006 (CST) ::Not really. Someone will still have to go through and purge/null edit every page for the template to update. --68.142.14.96 14:08, 10 March 2006 (CST) :::I was thinking more along the lines of the problems with the skillset template and skill images than redoing the boss infobox template. - Evil_Greven 14:11, 10 March 2006 (CST) are you done with your template or need more time? Assuming you have paid attention to the difference between Option A1 (which lost) and Option A2 (which won) in GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Skills/Archive 4#14-day Vote: Revamp Skill boxes?, are you going to modify how your template works, withdrawing it from the proposal, or proposing it as-is dispite that's what people voted against the last time? I won't disqualify it if it's the last case, but just want to point out that the last voting on the matter indicated ppl in general don't want to have the same info at two places, even if the two places could be in the same article. -PanSola 19:03, 10 March 2006 (CST) :I think I'll just leave it merely as an alternative design. I was disappointed that I couldn't get the includes to work with it properly, but ah well. - Evil_Greven 02:10, 11 March 2006 (CST) ::BTW can you demo how the landscape will look on Shield Stance and Rush? I noticed your demos currently all existing skills that use 4 stats. -PanSola 05:11, 13 March 2006 (CST) :::Done and done. Also, I missed something when I was doing the template, so now it looks much nicer. - Evil_Greven 06:06, 13 March 2006 (CST) :::Er, noticed there's no test for long attribute name & detail, so I added Troll Unguent (Wilderness Survival) and Call of Protection (115 recharge). - Evil_Greven 06:17, 13 March 2006 (CST)